Should You Believe In The Trinity?

[terri910]

OK, Terri, WHAT'S THE ANSWER???
I don't even know the question.

I just liked picturing you as Horshack.:razz:

[Tucson Jim]

I don't even know the question.

I just liked picturing you as Horshack.:razz:

It's actually not so far off . . .

:Snort: :Snort: Just call me Arnold!

[Tucson Jim]

So who, dear Warrior, was Jesus in the beginning?

We know that He was a man while He walked the earth, thus he was necessarily totally dependent on and subservient to His Father, but we also know that He created the earth and everything else IN THE BEGINNING, so who was He then?


The answer, Terri, and everyone else, is that He is God.

[terri910]

The answer, Terri, and everyone else, is that He is God.
Oh, THAT question! *LOL*

Well, of course!

[DispensationalJim]

The answer, Terri, and everyone else, is that He is God.

We have a winner!!!

In this special contest, the 2nd prize is a trip to Detroit, MI.

The first prize is... you don't have to go to Detroit!! :))

(in case you don't know, folks, I live in the Detroit area, so I'm allowed to make jokes about Detroit) :)

[Tucson Jim]

We have a winner!!!

In this special contest, the 2nd prize is a trip to Detroit, MI.

The first prize is... you don't have to go to Detroit!! :))

(in case you don't know, folks, I live in the Detroit area, so I'm allowed to make jokes about Detroit) :)

YIPPEE!!! I don't have to go to Detroit!!

(In case you don't know, I travel ALL the time for my job and don't want to go ANYWHERE! Not even Detroit! :whistle:)

[the oldtimer]

;) they arent. The wording in Matthew 28:19 was changed by the Catholic church. Click >>here (http://apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/matt2819-willis.htm)<<



Furthermore, there is not one single example of anyone being baptised using the triune method anywhere in scripture. Not one.

There is a reason why we have four gospels. God inspired each writer to write the same truth from different points of view. John did not record the Great Commission, but we will look at what the others said. When we look at Mark’s account we read: Mark 16:15 Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues
So we see that Mark records the command to go and baptize, but does not speak of a name in connection with baptism. However, we do see a mention of Jesus’ name in the very next verse. More importantly we need to look at how the apostles obeyed these commands which we will see in the book of Acts. But now lets look at Luke’s account: Luke 24:47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.
So here we read a command to preach repentance and remission of sins, in His name (which is fulfilled in Acts 2). If we look at the preceding verse we see that the pronoun His refers to Christ. So repentance and remission of sins are to be preached in Jesus’ name! Where do we receive the remission of sins? Well, let’s look at what Jesus’ disciples did with this command: Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, 'Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.'
So we have three different accounts of what Jesus’ commanded His apostles at the Great Commission. Now we look at how they obeyed Jesus’ words. We should take note that Jesus died after the Passover, was buried for 3 days and was then on the earth for 40 days after the resurrection (Acts 1:3). From the Passover until Pentecost is 50 days (Pente- means 50). So only about a week transpired between Jesus commission and Peter’s sermon on Pentecost. Surely they didn’t forget His command that fast. It is also interesting that Matthew, who later wrote Matt. 28:19 was present as well (Acts 1:13). We would expect him to stand up and stop Peter if he was preaching the wrong thing! ("Hey Pete, don’t you know that Jesus said . . . ") But we don’t see that. So we need to reconcile these two facts:

Jesus said this: Matthew 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit


They did this: Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptized, everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ . . .

Now who would be in the best position to understand the meaning of Jesus’ words? Us, almost 2,000 years later, or His own disciples who He spoke them to. Throughout the book of Acts as we will see they routinely baptized people in Jesus’ name. And when we read the Epistles to the churches, we will find out that they too were baptized in Jesus’ name. So it is obvious that Jesus’ disciples understood the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost to be Jesus! NOWHERE in scripture do we find anyone being baptized using these words, only in Jesus’ name. Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized.

Acts 8:16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

Acts 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 22:16 'And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.'
So Peter, John and the rest of the disciples baptized in the Jesus’ name throughout Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. And Paul re-baptized the believers in Ephesus in Jesus' name (19:1-5). Now let’s look at some of the other churches: Romans 6:3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?

Romans 6:4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
The reason that we are baptized in Jesus’ name is that we are being baptized into Jesus. We are taking on his name, similar to the way a woman takes on her husband's name. We are saying that we belong to Jesus and we are identifying with Him in His death and burial. Even if God were a trinity, Jesus is the one who died for us and He is the one who the Christians at Rome were buried with. 1 Corinthians 1:13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
If we follow Paul’s train of thought, his obvious implication is "No, Christ was the one crucified for you and so you were baptized in the name of Christ" So the believers at Corinth as well as those in Rome were baptized in Jesus’ name. Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Colossians 2:11 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.
In addition to those in Rome, Corinth and Ephesus (as well as Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria), we see that the Christians in Colosse and those in the region of Galatia were all baptized in Jesus’ name. They would not have connected baptism so exclusively with Christ had they routinely baptized using the words "Father, Son and Holy Spirit." As I said before, the only way that we see anyone being baptized is in Jesus' name. When Jesus’ was on this earth, He baptized His disciples (John 4:1,2) and then commissioned them to go and baptize others in His name, or in His place.1 When Jesus baptized someone, He didn’t have to say "in Jesus name." He was Jesus. But when we stand in his stead, we do it in his name. Scripture tells us that whatever we do in word or deed should be done in Jesus’ name (Col. 3:17). Baptism is an act of both word and deed.

Again, history shows us that the Catholic Church changed the way that people were baptized. (http://apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/name.htm)

BRITANICA ENCYCLOPEDIA The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son & Holy Ghost by the Catholic Church in the Second Century. – 11th Edit., Vol. 3, ppg. 365-366.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Here the Catholics acknowledged that baptism was changed by the Catholic Church. – Vol. 2, pg. 263.

An interesting read. I do not know if you recall when I spoke of the Bible I used to carry on the street. Every time a person would disagree with some thing in the Bible I would look it up and simply tear that page out and throw it away. Well, I dug out that Bible and found that page is already missing. In fact, so is the rest of the book of Matthew.

[Fire Watch]

Well, thats no way to be. I agree with the Bible 110%. I've shown however, that not everything everyone believes can be backed up with that Bible. Too much of what people believe is tradition, and not contextually, historically, and Hermaneutically sustainable.

[the oldtimer]

Well, thats no way to be. I agree with the Bible 110%. I've shown however, that not everything everyone believes can be backed up with that Bible. Too much of what people believe is tradition, and not contextually, historically, and Hermaneutically sustainable.
But, Matthew is still missing.

[Fire Watch]

Not in my Bible ;)

[Warrior4God]

In Christian love I tell you I believe you 1) rely too much on "logic" (despite the fact that there is nothing illogical about the trinity) and what "makes sense" to you, and 2) you absolutely refuse to take into account the fact that Jesus was in the humbled state of a man when He made the comments you have posted, and 3) your operative assumption is a Unitarian nature of God, therefore any statements showing a difference between the Father and the Son is interpreted by you to mean the trinity can't be true.

I respectfully believe you are in error on all these points.

Yet, your heart is good, you love your brothers (and sisters) who name Christ as Lord, and therefore I can do nothing else but point out where I think you are in error and then love you as a brother and pray for you, which I do.

Plus I'm just so happy you're back it's hard to debate with you!! Hope you're doing well and continue to get better!

I know you think that I am looking at things with too much logic and I understand why...........
When looking at things with only a logical 5 senses approach then you would have to throw out that God even exists at all.
(thats why God endued us with power via The Holy Spirit)
However I believe God provided man logic to be able to discern truth from error and to see the scriptures fit together.

Jim you have truly inspired me these last few months and believe your heart is sincere and true to doing your best to walk in love.

Proud to say I know you and that as my brother your walk in Christ makes the Body of Christ stronger and more unified.


Oh and I would also point out that while Christ sits on Gods right hand in heaven he is called a man and that he is mediator between God and man (He is no longer on earth as man and till man in heaven........not God)
This is a fact and truth that can't be discounted or denied.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

[Tucson Jim]

I know you think that I am looking at things with too much logic and I understand why...........
When looking at things with only a logical 5 senses approach then you would have to throw out that God even exists at all.
(thats why God endued us with power via The Holy Spirit)
However I believe God provided man logic to be able to discern truth from error and to see the scriptures fit together.

Jim you have truly inspired me these last few months and believe your heart is sincere and true to doing your best to walk in love.

Proud to say I know you and that as my brother your walk in Christ makes the Body of Christ stronger and more unified.


Oh and I would also point out that while Christ sits on Gods right hand in heaven he is called a man and that he is mediator between God and man (He is no longer on earth as man and till man in heaven........not God)
This is a fact and truth that can't be discounted or denied.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Thanks for your kindness towards me Warrior - I'm also proud to know you and grateful to God for you and the love you shows towards the brethren.

Yes, it is a fact Christ is our mediator as you said - He is also called our great high priest. (Heb 4:14).

I admit it is hard to understand how someone could be a mediator between God and man and yet still have the nature of God and man. Yet the Bible declares that Jesus is God and that he is man, as we have discussed in detail.

To add even more difficulty, the Bible says he was not only the priest, but also the sacrifice being offered by - you guessed it - Himself!! Most priests would offer the sacrificial animal to God. Jesus was both the priest and the sacrifice, offering up Himself for our sins.

These things are not easy to understand but I believe they are true because the Bible teaches them. I believe the Trinity doctrine does the best job of reconciling all these things, so that is why I believe it.

But I know you see it differently, and I respect that Warrior.

Peace, and hopes for a full recovery. How are you feeling?

[DRS]

It is not that difficult to understand how Jesus is the high priest and presents his perfect human life through the blood to God

Jesus is called the begotten god and the son of God and lots of other titles many other servents of the Almighty have been called before and like Jesus to is called a servent of Jehovah

[Angryamerican]

It seems to me, AA, that you have a serious conundrum on your hands, there.

How do YOU rationalize this verse then? BTW, AA, I think "rationalize" is the word you should have used above -- look up "ration" and see.
• John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

=====================================

And then here is another conundrum for you, AA:

• Gen. 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
• Gen. 33:10 And Jacob said, Nay, I pray thee, if now I have found grace in thy sight, then receive my present at my hand: for therefore I have seen thy face, as though I had seen the face of God, and thou wast pleased with me.
• Ex. 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
• Ex. 24:11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.
• Num. 14:14 And they will tell it to the inhabitants of this land: for they have heard that thou LORD art AMONG THIS PEOPLE, THAT THOU LORD art seen face to face, and that thy cloud standeth over them, and that thou goest before them, by day time in a pillar of a cloud, and in a pillar of fire by night.
• Deut. 5:4 The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,

================================

So, AA, can you "rationalize" those verses with your "No man can see God"?

At ANYTIME really did not mean ANYTIME is that what you are saying ?

So Jesus is wrong when he said not at ANYTIME did you hear the voice of God nor saw him ?

So are the scriptures contradicting each other ?

[Angryamerican]

A hollow and false criterion, as you know.

You need to consider the evidence from the WHOLE Bible not just what Jesus said.

As you also know . . .


:eek:

[Angryamerican]

Some will be cast into eternal hellfire, according to the Bible.

Peace, security,Unity in Hell???

Wow we disagree on what hell is to.

[Angryamerican]

Assumptions and interpretations.

Show me a verse that says God created Jesus.

We did but you refuse to believe it.

[Angryamerican]

Nonsense.

Can God ever lower his standards ?

[Angryamerican]

Sarcasm is not very Godly DRS.

We agree on something .

[Angryamerican]

No, you quoted your interpretation of the Bible, and apparently, cannot tell the difference.

Sorry Tj, the word interpretation is a cop out answer,unless you think the word of God has more thaN one meaning.

[Angryamerican]

It seems to me, AA, that you have a serious conundrum on your hands, there.

How do YOU rationalize this verse then? BTW, AA, I think "rationalize" is the word you should have used above -- look up "ration" and see.
• John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

=====================================

And then here is another conundrum for you, AA:

• Gen. 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
• Gen. 33:10 And Jacob said, Nay, I pray thee, if now I have found grace in thy sight, then receive my present at my hand: for therefore I have seen thy face, as though I had seen the face of God, and thou wast pleased with me.
• Ex. 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
• Ex. 24:11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.
• Num. 14:14 And they will tell it to the inhabitants of this land: for they have heard that thou LORD art AMONG THIS PEOPLE, THAT THOU LORD art seen face to face, and that thy cloud standeth over them, and that thou goest before them, by day time in a pillar of a cloud, and in a pillar of fire by night.
• Deut. 5:4 The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,

================================

So, AA, can you "rationalize" those verses with your "No man can see God"?

Morning Dj,i am short on time today, i hope i have time to address this tomorrow.

But something for you to think about until than. Why did the jews believe they could not see God without dying ?

And who actually did men see when speaking to God ?

[the oldtimer]

Not in my Bible ;)
Keep tearing!!:razz::razz:

[the oldtimer]

We did but you refuse to believe it.
Ahh! I believe that would be because the verses you quote do not even"imply" that the Father "created" Jesus.

[DRS]

Ahh! I believe that would be because the verses you quote do not even"imply" that the Father "created" Jesus.

the beginning of the creation by God,

How does that not make him created?

How about the fact he is called the first born of creation

[the oldtimer]

Wow we disagree on what hell is to.

Why should that surprise you. We are supposed to be be discussing the entire trinity, when in fact we can not come to an agreement on even, one, member of the trinity. Or as you say non-trinity. Your God, has a "created" son, ours has a, begotten, Son. They cannot logically be the same God. To us Jesus, is God come in the flesh, to you, he is just another man. They again cannot logically be the same person.

[the oldtimer]

the beginning of the creation by God,

How does that not make him created?

How about the fact he is called the first born of creation
This statement shows exactly what I have been saying all along. That the Jesus of which you speak is "created". And just another man. The Jesus, that I worship is the only "begotten" Son of God. Now, to save you some time I will tell you that I already know the words, created and begotten, can mean the same thing. But you and I both know that in this case they do not.

[DRS]

Or as you say non-trinity. Your God, has a "created" son, ours has a, begotten, Son. They cannot logically be the same God. To us Jesus, is God come in the flesh, to you, he is just another man. They again cannot logically be the same person.

Since begotten and created mean the same thing your point is moot

Jesus was a perfect man, sent by God a servant of God. The anointed of Jehovah hence the messiah or Christ, given authority by God, the prophet whom those wishing to gain everlasting life must listen to

[DRS]

This statement shows exactly what I have been saying all along. That the Jesus of which you speak is "created". And just another man. The Jesus, that I worship is the only "begotten" Son of God. Now, to save you some time I will tell you that I already know the words, created and begotten, can mean the same thing. But you and I both know that in this case they do not.

Jesus is referred to as both the begotten god and the beginning of creation by God, they do not cancel each other out nor do they create a contradiction, they simply show Jesus has a beginning

Now if you worship the agent of salvation whom God sent and raised up that is your choice but we see what happened in the past when people started worshipping that which God uses to save mankind

[the oldtimer]

Read post #182in the, "What happens after we die thread".

[the oldtimer]

Jesus is referred to as both the begotten god and the beginning of creation by God, they do not cancel each other out nor do they create a contradiction, they simply show Jesus has a beginning
It is also stated in the Bible that Jesus is before "ALL" things. I am well aware that in the NWT. the word [other] was ADDED by your religion (which must remain nameless). Thus changing the meaning of the scripture to fit their dogma. But, the truth remains that the verse does say Jesus, was"before, ALL things. And yes I am aware that you do not believe that the word "ALL" means "EVERYTHING". So, that should save you some time.
My point is, that you will accept a verse that you KNOW has a word added (NWT) but will not accept it as it is originally written (KJV). This to me is illogical.
And you twist Prov.8:22 to be talking about Jesus having a beginning when it is very clearly, in context speaking of wisdom. This has been debated many times in the past but you have never explained in logical terms how this change can be made.

[DRS]

Just out of curiousity what faith are you Oldtimer

[the oldtimer]

Just out of curiousity what faith are you Oldtimer
Christian!!

[Angryamerican]

I imagine that "crowd" will give you various answers to you Jesus is not God crowd. :rolleyes:


I do not believe these words are attributed to Jesus, Angryamerican. But, I do believe they are part of the inerrant word of God. And I believe they speak to the idea that Christian love confirms our knowledge of God, whose nature -- whose very being -- is love. When people "saw" Jesus' physical body here on earth, I believe they were seeing part of the nature of his full humanity. It does not necessarily mean that when one looked at the physical body that one was "seeing" his full nature as God. IMO, Jesus still revealed his nature as fully God, just as his fully human nature was obvious. Otherwise, how could He have said (and these are Jesus' words):
(John 14:7)
{John 14:9)
(John 10:30)


Jesus may have been saying that no one has heard the voice or seen the shape (things of a physical human nature) of God the Father. But considering who He is talking to and his next words: "and you do not have his word remaining in you, because you do not believe in the one whom he has sent." it might be that the people he is speaking to have not recognized God even as He stands there before them because they do not believe....

Once again, not Jesus' words (the next verse tells you this is the testimony of John). The Son, he says, has revealed the God that no one has seen. It is also said, in the very first verses of that first chapter:
Which, as you know, we "Jesus is God crowd" believe says exactly that.

You are taking scriptures out of context here terri.

[Angryamerican]

It seems to me, AA, that you have a serious conundrum on your hands, there.

How do YOU rationalize this verse then? BTW, AA, I think "rationalize" is the word you should have used above -- look up "ration" and see.
• John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

=====================================

And then here is another conundrum for you, AA:

• Gen. 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
• Gen. 33:10 And Jacob said, Nay, I pray thee, if now I have found grace in thy sight, then receive my present at my hand: for therefore I have seen thy face, as though I had seen the face of God, and thou wast pleased with me.
• Ex. 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
• Ex. 24:11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.
• Num. 14:14 And they will tell it to the inhabitants of this land: for they have heard that thou LORD art AMONG THIS PEOPLE, THAT THOU LORD art seen face to face, and that thy cloud standeth over them, and that thou goest before them, by day time in a pillar of a cloud, and in a pillar of fire by night.
• Deut. 5:4 The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,

================================

So, AA, can you "rationalize" those verses with your "No man can see God"?

The thing is Dj you are not posting enough of the story.

11. Then the Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man would speak to his companion, and he would return to the camp, but his attendant, Joshua, the son of Nun, a lad, would not depart from the tent. יא. וְדִבֶּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים כַּאֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ וְשָׁב אֶל הַמַּחֲנֶה וּמְשָׁרְתוֹ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן נַעַר לֹא יָמִישׁ מִתּוֹךְ הָאֹהֶל:
12. Moses said to the Lord: "Look, You say to me: 'Bring this people up!' But You have not informed me whom You will send with me. And You said: 'I have known you by name and you have also found favor in My eyes.' יב. וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל יְ־הֹוָ־ה רְאֵה אַתָּה אֹמֵר אֵלַי הַעַל אֶת הָעָם הַזֶּה וְאַתָּה לֹא הוֹדַעְתַּנִי אֵת אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁלַח עִמִּי וְאַתָּה אָמַרְתָּ יְדַעְתִּיךָ בְשֵׁם וְגַם מָצָאתָ חֵן בְּעֵינָי:
13. And now, if I have indeed found favor in Your eyes, pray let me know Your ways, so that I may know You, so that I may find favor in Your eyes; and consider that this nation is Your people." יג. וְעַתָּה אִם נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ הוֹדִעֵנִי נָא אֶת דְּרָכֶךָ וְאֵדָעֲךָ לְמַעַן אֶמְצָא חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ וּרְאֵה כִּי עַמְּךָ הַגּוֹי הַזֶּה:
14. So He said, "My Presence will go, and I will give you rest." יד. וַיֹּאמַר פָּנַי יֵלֵכוּ וַהֲנִחֹתִי לָךְ:
15. And he said to Him, "If Your Presence does not go [with us], do not take us up from here. טו. וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אִם אֵין פָּנֶיךָ הֹלְכִים אַל תַּעֲלֵנוּ מִזֶּה:
16. For how then will it be known that I have found favor in Your eyes, I and Your people? Is it not in that You will go with us? Then I and Your people will be distinguished from every [other] nation on the face of the earth." טז. וּבַמֶּה יִוָּדַע אֵפוֹא כִּי מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ אֲנִי וְעַמֶּךָ הֲלוֹא בְּלֶכְתְּךָ עִמָּנוּ וְנִפְלִינוּ אֲנִי וְעַמְּךָ מִכָּל הָעָם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה:
17. And the Lord said to Moses: "Even this thing that you have spoken, I will do, for you have found favor in My eyes, and I have known you by name." יז. וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה גַּם אֶת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר דִּבַּרְתָּ אֶעֱשֶׂה כִּי מָצָאתָ חֵן בְּעֵינַי וָאֵדָעֲךָ בְּשֵׁם:
18. And he said: "Show me, now, Your glory!" יח. וַיֹּאמַר הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ:
19. He said: "I will let all My goodness pass before you; I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you, and I will favor when I wish to favor, and I will have compassion when I wish to have compassion." יט. וַיֹּאמֶר אֲנִי אַעֲבִיר כָּל טוּבִי עַל פָּנֶיךָ וְקָרָאתִי בְשֵׁם יְ־הֹוָ־ה לְפָנֶיךָ וְחַנֹּתִי אֶת אֲשֶׁר אָחֹן וְרִחַמְתִּי אֶת אֲשֶׁר אֲרַחֵם:
20. And He said, "You will not be able to see My face, for man shall not see Me and live." כ. וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא תוּכַל לִרְאֹת אֶת פָּנָי כִּי לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי:
21. And the Lord said: "Behold, there is a place with Me, and you shall stand on the rock. כא. וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הֹוָ־ה הִנֵּה מָקוֹם אִתִּי וְנִצַּבְתָּ עַל הַצּוּר:
22. And it shall be that when My glory passes by, I will place you into the cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with My hand until I have passed by. כב. וְהָיָה בַּעֲבֹר כְּבֹדִי וְשַׂמְתִּיךָ בְּנִקְרַת הַצּוּר וְשַׂכֹּתִי כַפִּי עָלֶיךָ עַד עָבְרִי:
23. Then I will remove My hand, and you will see My back but My face shall not be seen."


Who is moses truly seeing here ?

Well lets see who the presence of God is.

Isa 63:9 In all their affliction He was afflicted, and the Angel of His Presence saved them; in His love and in His pity He redeemed them; and He bore them, and carried them all the days of old.

Who did moses see in the burning bush ?

Did he truly see God face to face ?

He said here no one can see his face or they will die.

So the face to face comment has a different meaning than what you think.

[Angryamerican]

I must confess I have no idea what you are trying to show here!!

If the NT is divinely inspired, then your side loses, since the NT says Jesus is God. no matter when it was written.

Maybe you need to take your own advice and pay attention :))

[Angryamerican]

More sarcasm DRS? Do you think that pleases Jehovah?

Sorry that is not sarcasm,that is reasoning.

[Angryamerican]

:)) You have GOT to be kidding!! We "attack" DRS???

Practically every post from DRS drips with sarcasm and condescension, and you think WE are the ones attacking?

OK . . .




Please.

It was DRS' interpretation of the scriptures that constitutes Watchtower Dogma, as I made very clear.

The correct word is reasoning, you are just to busy not to see he is trying to reason out their thought process.

Don't get so defensive.

[Angryamerican]

Yes, the truth hurts, doesn't it . . .

Your truth and mine are clearly different.

[Angryamerican]

I cannot help but think this is intentionally misrepresnting what you know is our belief because we have told you a thousand times:

Jesus is fully God and fully man. Please try to be fair and accurate when you portray our beliefs.



We don't. He was obviously referring to God the Father.



Yes.

That would seem to support our view however . . .

So the man was not God ?

[Angryamerican]

I cannot help but think this is intentionally misrepresnting what you know is our belief because we have told you a thousand times:

Jesus is fully God and fully man. Please try to be fair and accurate when you portray our beliefs.



We don't. He was obviously referring to God the Father.



Yes.

That would seem to support our view however . . .

So if the man Jesus was God,than why did Jesus say God has never been seen by man nor no man has heard his voice at ANYTIME ?

[Angryamerican]

He had the nature of God and the nature of man.

He was fully God and fully man.

I know . . . it's a hard concept . . . but try to remember, we are talking about God here. He might be a little complicated . . .

Than why would God say this ?


1Jn 4:12 No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love having been perfected is in us.

Joh 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares Him.

Joh 5:37 And the Father, the One sending Me, has Himself borne witness concerning Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor have you seen His form.

Obviously Jesus can't be God.

[Angryamerican]

Already answered it - Triune God, remember?

Sorry,no this does not support your view.

[Angryamerican]

Gensis is Jacob wrestling with an angel

24*Finally Jacob was left by himself. Then a man began to grapple with him until the dawn ascended. 25*When he got to see that he had not prevailed over him, then he touched the socket of his thigh joint; and the socket of Jacob’s thigh joint got out of place during his grappling with him. 26*After that he said: “Let me go, for the dawn has ascended.” To this he said: “I am not going to let you go until you first bless me.” 27*So he said to him: “What is your name?” to which he said: “Jacob.” 28*Then he said: “Your name will no longer be called Jacob but Israel, for you have contended with God and with men so that you at last prevailed.” 29*In turn Jacob inquired and said: “Tell me, please, your name.” However, he said: “Why is it that you inquire for my name?” With that he blessed him there. 30*Hence Jacob called the name of the place Pe‧ni′el, because, to quote him, “I have seen God face to face and yet my soul was delivered.”

Exodus makes the distiction between how Moses was dealt with and the rest of the nation was dealt with for we see in that same chapter

20*And he added: “You are not able to see my face, because no man may see me and yet live


Now if you think Numbers is literal then you must believe also that Jehovah was actually in amongst the people

Great point Daniel.

[Angryamerican]

No, thank you for confirmation.

If Jesus is not God manifest, then His sacrifice is not perfect, and we are all for not.

Are Angels perfect ? after all they reside with God.

[Angryamerican]

I see that wikipedia seems to fit what you want it to, this time. I did notice though, that It says, " It literally means the "complete life of a being" though it is, USUALLY, used in the sense of "living being (breathing creature) Which of course would not tend to fit in your translation. But, so what?

Without breathing or blood you die correct ?

[the oldtimer]

Since begotten and created mean the same thing your point is moot

Jesus was a perfect man, sent by God a servant of God. The anointed of Jehovah hence the messiah or Christ, given authority by God, the prophet whom those wishing to gain everlasting life must listen to
Again you display your arrogance by refusing to answer the question that was asked.

[Angryamerican]

OK.



I don't have to "elevate" Jesus - He's already there!!

As far as worship, you will one day worship Jesus too. Just wait . . .

No God had to exalt him remember.

Php 2:9 Because of this also God highly exalted Him and gave Him a name above every name,

[the oldtimer]

Without breathing or blood you die correct ?
Your body dies yes but everyone following this post knows that I am not speaking of the body, but of the SPIRIT. I am sure this is a point that you are well aware of. Yet you treat us, as if we were idiots who can not see the difference.

[the oldtimer]

So if the man Jesus was God,than why did Jesus say God has never been seen by man nor no man has heard his voice at ANYTIME ?
And why would He say" if you have seen me, you have seen the father" :doh:

[the oldtimer]

AA, and DRS, let me ask you this. If you do not know until the final judgment where you are going how can you know for sure that you will go to heaven or earth. God may have something against you that you don't think is important enough to keep you in the grave, but He thinks is. Now, I can see that would cause a person fear, but very little hope. So again I will ask. Where, is the hope in your belief system??

[terri910]

Sorry Tj, the word interpretation is a cop out answer,unless you think the word of God has more thaN one meaning.
Sorry, Angryamerican, "interpretation" is exactly what goes on. One does not have to think there is more than one meaning (I would say "Truth") to God's word to realize that more than one interpretation of God's word is out there. If there weren't, there'd be no "Should You Believe In the Trinity?" thread.

Until the entire Christian world decides that DRS is the final arbiter of what the Bible declares, then I'm afraid DRS is giving his interpretation of it, just as you do, and just as Tucson Jim does, and me, and everyone else.

There is but one Truth. But what is given here, is interpretation.

[terri910]

Morning Dj,i am short on time today, i hope i have time to address this tomorrow.

But something for you to think about until than. Why did the jews believe they could not see God without dying ?

And who actually did men see when speaking to God ?
You didn't answer DispensationalJim's question. :think:

[terri910]

You are taking scriptures out of context here terri.
Please expound.

I don't believe I have taken any scriptures out of context. And since I knew the difference between Jesus' words, and the words of apostles, I'm trusting my own understanding.

[terri910]

Your truth and mine are clearly different.
Bingo. And that is known as "interpretation," Angryamerican.

[terri910]

So if the man Jesus was God,than why did Jesus say God has never been seen by man nor no man has heard his voice at ANYTIME ?
Could you supply the verse that says that, Angryamerican?

[terri910]

Than why would God say this ?


1Jn 4:12 No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love having been perfected is in us.

Joh 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares Him.

Joh 5:37 And the Father, the One sending Me, has Himself borne witness concerning Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor have you seen His form.

Obviously Jesus can't be God.
How these verses are reconciled with the Trinitarian view has been given, Angryamerican. You don't accept that reconciliation, I know....but not only has the explanation been given, additional scriptures have been posted with the question for you of how you reconcile them. I have not seen your answer to that. All I see is you going back to your question.

Obviously, Jesus can be God. In fact, Him being the second person of the Trinity reconciles all the verses, since there is also God the Father that can be referred to as "God."

But all this has been posted time and time again.

[Warrior4God]

Bingo. And that is known as "interpretation," Angryamerican.

You have a point there terri but a verse of scripture makes me think that the Bible interprets itself and IMO if we could allow it to interpret itself we could clear alot of issues up easily I would think.



2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.


Why would God have that verse in there?

[terri910]

You have a point there terri but a verse of scripture makes me think that the Bible interprets itself and IMO if we could allow it to interpret itself we could clear alot of issues up easily I would think.



2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.


Why would God have that verse in there?
You think that verse says that the Bible interprets itself, and I couldn't disagree more if I tried! *L* (I'm not trying, btw) That is from Peter, right? Remember who Peter is to Catholics. That'll give you a clue as to my belief. While we should read and study the Bible, I do not believe it should be open to private interpretation, either. I believe Christ founded His Church and gave it the authority to teach, and divine protection in doing so, before the New Testament was ever written down.

But just because I believe the Bible shouldn't be privately interpreted doesn't mean it hasn't been.

[Warrior4God]

But just because I believe the Bible shouldn't be privately interpreted doesn't mean it hasn't been.

Thats the point I was trying to make Terri.

It has been interpreted and IMO should not be.

[terri910]

Thats the point I was trying to make Terri.

It has been interpreted and IMO should not be.
We likely agree in principle. But, not in practice, because you think the Bible says something that I am just as certain it does not.

[DispensationalJim]

The thing is Dj you are not posting enough of the story.

11. Then the Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man would speak to his companion, and he would return to the camp, but his attendant, Joshua, the son of Nun, a lad, would not depart from the tent. יא. וְדִבֶּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים כַּאֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ וְשָׁב אֶל הַמַּחֲנֶה וּמְשָׁרְתוֹ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן נַעַר לֹא יָמִישׁ מִתּוֹךְ הָאֹהֶל:
12. Moses said to the Lord: "Look, You say to me: 'Bring this people up!' But You have not informed me whom You will send with me. And You said: 'I have known you by name and you have also found favor in My eyes.' יב. וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל יְ־הֹוָ־ה רְאֵה אַתָּה אֹמֵר אֵלַי הַעַל אֶת הָעָם הַזֶּה וְאַתָּה לֹא הוֹדַעְתַּנִי אֵת אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁלַח עִמִּי וְאַתָּה אָמַרְתָּ יְדַעְתִּיךָ בְשֵׁם וְגַם מָצָאתָ חֵן בְּעֵינָי:
13. And now, if I have indeed found favor in Your eyes, pray let me know Your ways, so that I may know You, so that I may find favor in Your eyes; and consider that this nation is Your people." יג. וְעַתָּה אִם נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ הוֹדִעֵנִי נָא אֶת דְּרָכֶךָ וְאֵדָעֲךָ לְמַעַן אֶמְצָא חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ וּרְאֵה כִּי עַמְּךָ הַגּוֹי הַזֶּה:
14. So He said, "My Presence will go, and I will give you rest." יד. וַיֹּאמַר פָּנַי יֵלֵכוּ וַהֲנִחֹתִי לָךְ:
15. And he said to Him, "If Your Presence does not go [with us], do not take us up from here. טו. וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אִם אֵין פָּנֶיךָ הֹלְכִים אַל תַּעֲלֵנוּ מִזֶּה:
16. For how then will it be known that I have found favor in Your eyes, I and Your people? Is it not in that You will go with us? Then I and Your people will be distinguished from every [other] nation on the face of the earth." טז. וּבַמֶּה יִוָּדַע אֵפוֹא כִּי מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ אֲנִי וְעַמֶּךָ הֲלוֹא בְּלֶכְתְּךָ עִמָּנוּ וְנִפְלִינוּ אֲנִי וְעַמְּךָ מִכָּל הָעָם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה:
17. And the Lord said to Moses: "Even this thing that you have spoken, I will do, for you have found favor in My eyes, and I have known you by name." יז. וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה גַּם אֶת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר דִּבַּרְתָּ אֶעֱשֶׂה כִּי מָצָאתָ חֵן בְּעֵינַי וָאֵדָעֲךָ בְּשֵׁם:
18. And he said: "Show me, now, Your glory!" יח. וַיֹּאמַר הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ:
19. He said: "I will let all My goodness pass before you; I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you, and I will favor when I wish to favor, and I will have compassion when I wish to have compassion." יט. וַיֹּאמֶר אֲנִי אַעֲבִיר כָּל טוּבִי עַל פָּנֶיךָ וְקָרָאתִי בְשֵׁם יְ־הֹוָ־ה לְפָנֶיךָ וְחַנֹּתִי אֶת אֲשֶׁר אָחֹן וְרִחַמְתִּי אֶת אֲשֶׁר אֲרַחֵם:
20. And He said, "You will not be able to see My face, for man shall not see Me and live." כ. וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא תוּכַל לִרְאֹת אֶת פָּנָי כִּי לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי:
21. And the Lord said: "Behold, there is a place with Me, and you shall stand on the rock. כא. וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הֹוָ־ה הִנֵּה מָקוֹם אִתִּי וְנִצַּבְתָּ עַל הַצּוּר:
22. And it shall be that when My glory passes by, I will place you into the cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with My hand until I have passed by. כב. וְהָיָה בַּעֲבֹר כְּבֹדִי וְשַׂמְתִּיךָ בְּנִקְרַת הַצּוּר וְשַׂכֹּתִי כַפִּי עָלֶיךָ עַד עָבְרִי:
23. Then I will remove My hand, and you will see My back but My face shall not be seen."


.... (snip)

Well, AA, I see you are learning one of DRS's habits, like leaving off the book and chapter. Would it be too much trouble to tell us where that quote is from?

[Tucson Jim]

:eek:


Despite your little icon, Yes, you need to consider more than just the words of Jesus if you want to have an accurate picture of God's revelation.

[Tucson Jim]

Wow we disagree on what hell is to.

There's a shocker!!

So you think there is peace and security in hell???

[Tucson Jim]

We did but you refuse to believe it.

Not one verse that says "God created Jesus". That's all I ask for but you can't deliver.

I "refuse to believe" because you have no evidence.

[Tucson Jim]

Can God ever lower his standards ?


I don't know - it's still nonsense.

[Tucson Jim]

Sorry Tj, the word interpretation is a cop out answer,unless you think the word of God has more thaN one meaning.

Sorry AA, your interpretation is still just that.

And amazingly, you apparently cannot even tell when you're interpreting.

[Tucson Jim]

the beginning of the creation by God,

How does that not make him created?

How about the fact he is called the first born of creation

First born - the preeminent one. The Heir.

Besides, it certainly does NOT say "first created" now does it . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Since begotten and created mean the same thing your point is moot


So the OT fathers "created" their sons???

And Jesus "Begat" the stars in the sky???

Please . . . :rolleyes:

[Tucson Jim]

Jesus is referred to as both the begotten god and the beginning of creation by God, they do not cancel each other out nor do they create a contradiction, they simply show Jesus has a beginning

Whose goings forth have been from old, from the days of eternity . . . A beginning for God the Son???

Hardly . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Maybe you need to take your own advice and pay attention :))

Right back atcha!

[Tucson Jim]

Sorry that is not sarcasm,that is reasoning.

The sarcasm is there for all to see, despite your denial.

[Tucson Jim]

The correct word is reasoning, you are just to busy not to see he is trying to reason out their thought process.

Don't get so defensive.


That's cute AA - Say we are "attacking" DRS and then say we are "defensive" when we dispute that???

Okey dokey . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Your truth and mine are clearly different.

There's only one truth AA.

[Tucson Jim]

So the man was not God ?

So . . . now you're just messing with us? Get serious, please.

[Tucson Jim]

So if the man Jesus was God,than why did Jesus say God has never been seen by man nor no man has heard his voice at ANYTIME ?

Google "Trinity".

Perhaps that will help . . .

Clearly we cannot help you since we have been over this numerous times to no avail.

[Tucson Jim]

Than why would God say this ?


1Jn 4:12 No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love having been perfected is in us.

Joh 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares Him.

Joh 5:37 And the Father, the One sending Me, has Himself borne witness concerning Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor have you seen His form.

Obviously Jesus can't be God.

It's only "obvious" to those who haven't the faintest idea of what the concept "Triune" means.

[Tucson Jim]

Sorry,no this does not support your view.

Yes, actually, it completely supports it.

[Tucson Jim]

No God had to exalt him remember.

Php 2:9 Because of this also God highly exalted Him and gave Him a name above every name,

God only had to exalt Him because he first humbled Himself, remember?

[Tucson Jim]

Sorry, Angryamerican, "interpretation" is exactly what goes on. One does not have to think there is more than one meaning (I would say "Truth") to God's word to realize that more than one interpretation of God's word is out there. If there weren't, there'd be no "Should You Believe In the Trinity?" thread.

Until the entire Christian world decides that DRS is the final arbiter of what the Bible declares, then I'm afraid DRS is giving his interpretation of it, just as you do, and just as Tucson Jim does, and me, and everyone else.

There is but one Truth. But what is given here, is interpretation.

Precisely!

[Tucson Jim]

How these verses are reconciled with the Trinitarian view has been given, Angryamerican. You don't accept that reconciliation, I know....but not only has the explanation been given, additional scriptures have been posted with the question for you of how you reconcile them. I have not seen your answer to that. All I see is you going back to your question.

Obviously, Jesus can be God. In fact, Him being the second person of the Trinity reconciles all the verses, since there is also God the Father that can be referred to as "God."

But all this has been posted time and time again.

I believe the Latin is "ad nauseum".

[Tucson Jim]

You have a point there terri but a verse of scripture makes me think that the Bible interprets itself and IMO if we could allow it to interpret itself we could clear alot of issues up easily I would think.



2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.


Why would God have that verse in there?

To discourage the spread of heresy, I believe.

[the oldtimer]

HEY, DRS AND AA, Why haven't you answered MY questions. They are about ETERNAL LIFE, and if you think my son is in heaven or not, and where is the HOPE, in your belief. HOW COME YOU WON'T ANSWER ME. I REALLY WANT TO KNOW, you know.:whistle::whistle::whistle::whistle:

[the oldtimer]

I believe the Latin is "ad nauseum".

Ain't that when you don't feel good!!:D:D:D

[Angryamerican]

Jim I am sorry you are going through a tough time...


Mike can you explain, whether jews can actually see God and live ?

[Angryamerican]

So who, dear Warrior, was Jesus in the beginning?

We know that He was a man while He walked the earth, thus he was necessarily totally dependent on and subservient to His Father, but we also know that He created the earth and everything else IN THE BEGINNING, so who was He then?

Let's ask Fire Watch about that!! OK? If Fire Watch is too busy, maybe we'll go back and dig up one of his classic posts showing that Jesus IS GOD!!

Dj are you being sneaky ? i showed you who Jesus was before he became a man.:razz:

[Angryamerican]

OK, I found one...

Because one is similar to God, it does not make that one God Dj.

[Angryamerican]

The answer, Terri, and everyone else, is that He is God.

Thanks for your opinion :razz:

[Angryamerican]

Why should that surprise you. We are supposed to be be discussing the entire trinity, when in fact we can not come to an agreement on even, one, member of the trinity. Or as you say non-trinity. Your God, has a "created" son, ours has a, begotten, Son. They cannot logically be the same God. To us Jesus, is God come in the flesh, to you, he is just another man. They again cannot logically be the same person.

Well you got my view wrong.

[Angryamerican]

It is also stated in the Bible that Jesus is before "ALL" things. I am well aware that in the NWT. the word [other] was ADDED by your religion (which must remain nameless). Thus changing the meaning of the scripture to fit their dogma. But, the truth remains that the verse does say Jesus, was"before, ALL things. And yes I am aware that you do not believe that the word "ALL" means "EVERYTHING". So, that should save you some time.
My point is, that you will accept a verse that you KNOW has a word added (NWT) but will not accept it as it is originally written (KJV). This to me is illogical.
And you twist Prov.8:22 to be talking about Jesus having a beginning when it is very clearly, in context speaking of wisdom. This has been debated many times in the past but you have never explained in logical terms how this change can be made.

If Jesus was the first thing created by God would that make him before all things ?

Now we know God had no beginning correct ?

[Angryamerican]

Your body dies yes but everyone following this post knows that I am not speaking of the body, but of the SPIRIT. I am sure this is a point that you are well aware of. Yet you treat us, as if we were idiots who can not see the difference.

You see a spirit as something different than i.

[Angryamerican]

Your body dies yes but everyone following this post knows that I am not speaking of the body, but of the SPIRIT. I am sure this is a point that you are well aware of. Yet you treat us, as if we were idiots who can not see the difference.

Yes,when you die everything dies.

Job 14:13

(ASV) Oh that thou wouldest hide me in Sheol, That thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, That thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me!

(BBE) If only you would keep me safe in the underworld, putting me in a secret place till your wrath is past, giving me a fixed time when I might come to your memory again!

(GNB) I wish you would hide me in the world of the dead; let me be hidden until your anger is over, and then set a time to remember me.

(JPS) Oh that Thou wouldest hide me in the nether-world, that Thou wouldest keep me secret, until Thy wrath be past, that Thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me! -

(KJV+) O thatH4310 thou wouldestH5414 hideH6845 me in the grave,H7585 that thou wouldest keep me secret,H5641 untilH5704 thy wrathH639 be past,H7725 that thou wouldest appointH7896 me a set time,H2706 and rememberH2142 me!

(LITV) Who will grant that You would hide me in Sheol; You would conceal me until Your anger turns back; that You would set a limit for me and remember me?

(MKJV) Who will grant that You would hide me in the grave, that You would keep me secret, until Your wrath is past, that You would set me a fixed time and remember me?

(RV) Oh that thou wouldest hide me in Sheol, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me!

[Angryamerican]

And why would He say" if you have seen me, you have seen the father" :doh:


So do you think one scripture cancels out another scripture ?

Joh 6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God, He has seen the Father.

You should read a little more of that chapter you quote,this is also from that same chapter.

Joh 14:20 At that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.


And who is leading here?

Joh 14:31 But that the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father has given Me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go away from here.

[Angryamerican]

AA, and DRS, let me ask you this. If you do not know until the final judgment where you are going how can you know for sure that you will go to heaven or earth. God may have something against you that you don't think is important enough to keep you in the grave, but He thinks is. Now, I can see that would cause a person fear, but very little hope. So again I will ask. Where, is the hope in your belief system??

That is a good question,i just feel some would have been meant to be in heaven while the ones that are meant to be on earth will be just as happy as the ones going to heaven.

Whether you are in heaven or on the earth, you will have that personal relationship with God and his son,and that is what is truly important.

[Angryamerican]

Sorry, Angryamerican, "interpretation" is exactly what goes on. One does not have to think there is more than one meaning (I would say "Truth") to God's word to realize that more than one interpretation of God's word is out there. If there weren't, there'd be no "Should You Believe In the Trinity?" thread.

Until the entire Christian world decides that DRS is the final arbiter of what the Bible declares, then I'm afraid DRS is giving his interpretation of it, just as you do, and just as Tucson Jim does, and me, and everyone else.

There is but one Truth. But what is given here, is interpretation.

I feel there is only one truth in the word of God,and we either have it or we don't .

It's like a math problem,you have either the right answer or the wrong answer.

In this thread there is several views on God that are posted here, but only one can be correct ,and i feel it is the one that don't cause contradiction within Gods word.

That it is fully supported by scripture. but i think it is so simple a child can grasp it.

[Angryamerican]

You didn't answer DispensationalJim's question. :think:

Which one ?

[terri910]

To discourage the spread of heresy, I believe.
I almost put that in, but didn't want to say the "H" word. *L*

[terri910]

If Jesus was the first thing created by God would that make him before all things ?
No that would make him a created thing, included in the "all."

Now we know God had no beginning correct ?
Correct.

[terri910]

I feel there is only one truth in the word of God,and we either have it or we don't .

It's like a math problem,you have either the right answer or the wrong answer.

In this thread there is several views on God that are posted here, but only one can be correct ,and i feel it is the one that don't cause contradiction within Gods word.

That it is fully supported by scripture. but i think it is so simple a child can grasp it.
As I told Warrior, we agree in principle -- that there is but one Truth. But I feel as strongly that that one Truth is one thing, as you do that that that one Truth is something completely opposite. I feel as strongly that one view is the only one that dost not cause contradiction with God's word, as you feel another does. I feel as strongly that one view is supported by scripture, as you feel another does.

You get to make that decision for yourself, just as I do. It won't change the actual Truth. But since I believe you have it wrong, and you believe I have it wrong, then each according to the other is "interpreting."

[terri910]

Which one ?
*sigh* I read this and I have to wonder if you do read the posts you reply to.

He asked you how you reconciled some specific verses. Instead of answering, you asked your own questions over again.

I will go back and find it for you.

[terri910]

I believe this is the one:
http://forums.hannity.com/showpost.php?p=55754891&postcount=23016

[Angryamerican]

I imagine that "crowd" will give you various answers to you Jesus is not God crowd. :rolleyes:


I do not believe these words are attributed to Jesus, Angryamerican. But, I do believe they are part of the inerrant word of God. And I believe they speak to the idea that Christian love confirms our knowledge of God, whose nature -- whose very being -- is love. When people "saw" Jesus' physical body here on earth, I believe they were seeing part of the nature of his full humanity. It does not necessarily mean that when one looked at the physical body that one was "seeing" his full nature as God. IMO, Jesus still revealed his nature as fully God, just as his fully human nature was obvious. Otherwise, how could He have said (and these are Jesus' words):
(John 14:7)
{John 14:9)
(John 10:30)


Jesus may have been saying that no one has heard the voice or seen the shape (things of a physical human nature) of God the Father. But considering who He is talking to and his next words: "and you do not have his word remaining in you, because you do not believe in the one whom he has sent." it might be that the people he is speaking to have not recognized God even as He stands there before them because they do not believe....

Once again, not Jesus' words (the next verse tells you this is the testimony of John). The Son, he says, has revealed the God that no one has seen. It is also said, in the very first verses of that first chapter:
Which, as you know, we "Jesus is God crowd" believe says exactly that.

Why i feel you took these scriptures out of context.


John 14: 7-9 you believe these scriptures are saying that Jesus and God are one God but notice here he does not mention the Holy Spirit here as being one with Jesus or his Father. Why not if theses three persons make up the one God ?

What Jesus is saying is they are one in unity and Jesus clears up the Father and i are in each other a little further in the chapter.

Joh 14:20 At that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.

So do we also make up God ?


John 10:30 Here we see the same thing in this chapter.

Joh 10:36 do you say of Him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, You blaspheme, because I said, I am the Son of God?
Joh 10:37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me.
Joh 10:38 But if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works so that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.

Here he once again is pointing that he and his Father are one in unity,not one God.

In this chapter he also states his Father is greater than all,they can't be two persons that make up God if they are not equal can they ?

But this best shows how they are one in unity not the same God.

Joh 17:11 And now I am in the world no longer, but these are in the world, and I come to You, Holy Father. Keep them in Your name, those whom You have given Me, so that they may be one as We are.

Joh 17:22 And I have given them the glory which You have given Me, that they may be one, even as We are one,

So yes ,Jesus was not saying he and his father are one God he was saying they are one in unity.

[Angryamerican]

Bingo. And that is known as "interpretation," Angryamerican.

Wrong,one of us is right and one is wrong we both can't be right can we ?

[Angryamerican]

Could you supply the verse that says that, Angryamerican?


Joh 5:37 And He sending Me, the Father Himself, has borne witness of Me. Neither have you heard His voice at any time nor seen His shape

[terri910]

Joh 5:37 And He sending Me, the Father Himself, has borne witness of Me. Neither have you heard His voice at any time nor seen His shape
This has already been discussed, Angryamerican.

I'm quite certain others replied to it, and I know I did, in a specific reply to you. Do you remember anything I said about it?

[Angryamerican]

Well, AA, I see you are learning one of DRS's habits, like leaving off the book and chapter. Would it be too much trouble to tell us where that quote is from?

It is the same chapter you quoted to me Dj. :angel:

[Angryamerican]

Despite your little icon, Yes, you need to consider more than just the words of Jesus if you want to have an accurate picture of God's revelation.

Tj, i thought it was Jesus's revelation that was given to him by God.

[Angryamerican]

There's a shocker!!

So you think there is peace and security in hell???

No i believe it is the grave and everything there is dead and conscious of nothing.

[Angryamerican]

Not one verse that says "God created Jesus". That's all I ask for but you can't deliver.

I "refuse to believe" because you have no evidence.

That once again is only your opinion.

[Angryamerican]

I don't know - it's still nonsense.

Can God lower his standards to become less than he is,that question is nonsense to you ?

[Angryamerican]

Sorry AA, your interpretation is still just that.

And amazingly, you apparently cannot even tell when you're interpreting.

No i can't, i feel all scripture is in unity with no contradictions in it, and it has it's own interpretation.

Gods word does not need us to show what it means.

[terri910]

Can God lower his standards to become less than he is,that question is nonsense to you ?
Context, Angryamerican, context.

[Angryamerican]

First born - the preeminent one. The Heir.

Besides, it certainly does NOT say "first created" now does it . . .

He was the first born through creation.

[terri910]

No i can't, i feel all scripture is in unity with no contradictions in it, and it has it's own interpretation.

Gods word does not need us to show what it means.
:eh:

[Angryamerican]

Right back atcha!

You said it first :)):razz:

[Angryamerican]

The sarcasm is there for all to see, despite your denial.

If you say so.

[terri910]

He was the first born through creation.
I think TJ's point was that the scripture you provided doesn't say that.

[Angryamerican]

That's cute AA - Say we are "attacking" DRS and then say we are "defensive" when we dispute that???

Okey dokey . . .

It is only sarcasm if you get defensive and take it wrong.

[Angryamerican]

There's only one truth AA.

Bingo.

So why do you say we learn the truth through interpretation ?

[terri910]

Bingo.

So why do you say we learn the truth through interpretation ?
Oh, I want to know the context of TJ saying that.

Can you find the post where he said it, Angryamerican?

[Angryamerican]

So . . . now you're just messing with us? Get serious, please.

Jesus being fully man so he can't still be God, was and still is a question to you ?

[Angryamerican]

It's only "obvious" to those who haven't the faintest idea of what the concept "Triune" means.

Triune means three but God is one:razz:

[terri910]

Triune means three...
Nope. Incomplete. Try again.

...but God is one:razz:Yes. And that concept is also contained within the word "triune."


Hint: look at both sylables.

[Angryamerican]

God only had to exalt Him because he first humbled Himself, remember?

No

Why did God highly exalt Jesus ? the answer is in this post.

Php 2:5 For let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God,
Php 2:7 but made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Himself the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Php 2:9 Therefore God has highly exalted Him, and has given Him a name which is above every name,

Because he lowered himself to become a man and he gave his life to save all men that accept him.

[Angryamerican]

*sigh* I read this and I have to wonder if you do read the posts you reply to.

He asked you how you reconciled some specific verses. Instead of answering, you asked your own questions over again.

I will go back and find it for you.

I answered it.:confused:

[Angryamerican]

Context, Angryamerican, context.

I responded to your post asking why i thought you took scriptures out of context.

[Angryamerican]

:eh:

Ok i would like to add we do need to show some where they could be wrong :razz:

[Angryamerican]

I think TJ's point was that the scripture you provided doesn't say that.

First born of all creation, needs explaining ?

[Angryamerican]

Oh, I want to know the context of TJ saying that.

Can you find the post where he said it, Angryamerican?

That is my weakness terri,finding all the questions and and comments i respond to.

[Angryamerican]

So terri i took it you read my post showing that you took scriptures out of context ?

[terri910]

I responded to your post asking why i thought you took scriptures out of context.
*sigh*

My most recent post about context had to do with your exchange with TJ, Angryamerican.

[terri910]

I answered it.:confused:
Please direct me to that post.

Surely you can find your own posts? all you have to do is remember a little bit of what you said, and do a search.

[terri910]

Ok i would like to add we do need to show some where they could be wrong :razz:
That does not help make sense of your post.

In one sentence you say that the Bible interprets itself (interpret = to explain the meaning), and in the next you say the word doesn't need to show us what it means.

And, of course, now you are adding that you need to show how some have an incorrect understanding, which would be -- you guessed it -- explaining the meaning, which is, by definition, interpreting. Which you say doesn't have to be done.

No, this does not help make sense of your post at all.

[terri910]

First born of all creation, needs explaining ?
What in my words makes you ask that? Read the words I posted that you supposedly "replied" to. Nothing in it about not understanding what you said. What you said doesn't need explaining, it needs proving, Angryamerican. And, I believe TJ's point was that the scripture you provided didn't say what you claim it did, and thus does not prove what you are claiming it does.

[Angryamerican]

*sigh*

My most recent post about context had to do with your exchange with TJ, Angryamerican.

I know,but you posted three scriptures and you were insinuating that these verses were saying Jesus and God were one.

[terri910]

That is my weakness terri,finding all the questions and and comments i respond to.
It is fun to learn and grow, and develop strength. Perhaps you can do it if you try.

[Angryamerican]

That does not help make sense of your post.

In one sentence you say that the Bible interprets itself (interpret = to explain the meaning), and in the next you say the word doesn't need to show us what it means.

And, of course, now you are adding that you need to show how some have an incorrect understanding, which would be -- you guessed it -- explaining the meaning, which is, by definition, interpreting. Which you say doesn't have to be done.

No, this does not help make sense of your post at all.

Nope i just pointed out verses that showed your interpretation was wrong.

Gods word is self explanatory.

[Angryamerican]

What in my words makes you ask that? Read the words I posted that you supposedly "replied" to. Nothing in it about not understanding what you said. What you said doesn't need explaining, it needs proving, Angryamerican. And, I believe TJ's point was that the scripture you provided didn't say what you claim it did, and thus does not prove what you are claiming it does.

The words of God are self explanatory,they don't need us to interpret them.

[terri910]

I know,but...
So, rather than stay on point so that the discussion makes some sort of sense, you just decided to go off on a tangent totally unrelated to my post?

How does that work for you in your every day conversations?

[Angryamerican]

It is fun to learn and grow, and develop strength. Perhaps you can do it if you try.

I don't want a new wardrobe :))

[Dancer]

A triangle is triune. It has 3 sides, it has 3 angles, but it is ONE triangle.

[Angryamerican]

So, rather than stay on point so that the discussion makes some sort of sense, you just decided to go off on a tangent totally unrelated to my post?

How does that work for you in your every day conversations?

No terri i wanted you to ackowledge that you could have taken scriptures out of context.

And yes,i did respond to the ot verses that Dj posted and to what Tj posted.

I am wondering if you read what i actually post :whistle:

[terri910]

Nope i just pointed out verses that showed your interpretation was wrong.

Gods word is self explanatory.
"Nope"? "Nope" WHAT? Nope, your post with it's contradictory thoughts didn't make sense? Nope, that's not what you meant to say? Nope, you have no idea what "interpret" means?

[Angryamerican]

A triangle is triune. It has 3 sides, it has 3 angles, but it is ONE triangle.

Now if only you had scriptures to show that God is made up of three persons.

[Angryamerican]

"Nope"? "Nope" WHAT? Nope, your post with it's contradictory thoughts didn't make sense? Nope, that's not what you meant to say? Nope, you have no idea what "interpret" means?

Sure i do,i just let Gods word interpret itself.

[terri910]

No terri i wanted you to ackowledge that you could have taken scriptures out of context.
So just as I said, rather than stay on point so that the discussion makes some sort of sense, you wanted to go on to some other point. Like I asked (and you did not answer -- do you think that you did?), how does that work for you in your every day life?

And yes,i did respond to the ot verses that Dj posted and to what Tj posted.

I am wondering if you read what i actually post :whistle:
I do read what you post, but I could miss one or two. I'm afraid that you probably think you have answered something, and I see no answer whatsoever in them. That's why I ask for you to provide the post, in case I have missed one that actually DOES answer a question.

[terri910]

Sure i do,i just let Gods word interpret itself.
But you said God's word doesn't have to explain what it means. That is contradictory to the idea that God's word explains what it means. And those contradictory statements were both yours. In one single post.

[terri910]

A triangle is triune. It has 3 sides, it has 3 angles, but it is ONE triangle.
Thanks for reminding me that Angryamerican did not reply to my post that his definition of "triune" was incomplete and that my request that he try again was ignored.

[Angryamerican]

So just as I said, rather than stay on point so that the discussion makes some sort of sense, you wanted to go on to some other point. Like I asked (and you did not answer -- do you think that you did?), how does that work for you in your every day life?


I do read what you post, but I could miss one or two. I'm afraid that you probably think you have answered something, and I see no answer whatsoever in them. That's why I ask for you to provide the post, in case I have missed one that actually DOES answer a question.

Ok lets try this one more time,you provide the question that was asked and i will respond to it again,so there is no misunderstanding.

I now have no idea to what question i did not answer.

I may have missed one to,but i am sure i responded to the question you think i missed.

[terri910]

Now if only you had scriptures to show that God is made up of three persons.
Scriptural support has been provided over and over again, Angryamerican. To use your own words, we've provided scriptures to show you your interpretation is wrong.

But, none of this changes the fact that you either (1) did/do not know what "triune" means, or (2) purposely gave an incomplete definition of it.

[Angryamerican]

But you said God's word doesn't have to explain what it means. That is contradictory to the idea that God's word explains what it means. And those contradictory statements were both yours. In one single post.

Yes i feel that if one dedicates one self to the word of God there is no need for interpretation that Gods word explains itself.

Bad grammar sorry.

[Angryamerican]

Thanks for reminding me that Angryamerican did not reply to my post that his definition of "triune" was incomplete and that my request that he try again was ignored.

Triune

("three-in-one, one-in-three"): a being with three aspects or modes of existence (eg Father, Son and the Holy Spirit in traditional ...

[terri910]

Ok lets try this one more time,you provide the question that was asked and i will respond to it again,so there is no misunderstanding.

I now have no idea to what question i did not answer.

I may have missed one to,but i am sure i responded to the question you think i missed.
You're joking, right? The post that I had to GO BACK AND FIND FOR YOU and then POSTED A LINK TO? I have to go find it again for you and post a link again?

Nope. I'm going to go back to DJ's post where he asked how you "rationalize" (I remember that word because he even pointed out to you that you said "ration" instead of "rationalize"). And then, even if it takes me all day (because I can only check between other tasts), I am going to read each and every post by you subsequent to DJ's question.

You see, Angryamerican, I think clarity in thinking and this discussion is worth the effort. I wish I thought you felt the same.

[Angryamerican]

Scriptural support has been provided over and over again, Angryamerican. To use your own words, we've provided scriptures to show you your interpretation is wrong.

But, none of this changes the fact that you either (1) did/do not know what "triune" means, or (2) purposely gave an incomplete definition of it.

Are you gonna address the post where you took scriptures out of context to support your view ?

[terri910]

Yes i feel that if one dedicates one self to the word of God there is no need for interpretation that Gods word explains itself.So, you figure everyone else that does not glean the same meaning from the same Bible hasn't really dedicated themselves to the word of God?

Bad grammar sorry.
I guess this comes under, "Nope, I didn't mean to say what I said."

[Angryamerican]

You're joking, right? The post that I had to GO BACK AND FIND FOR YOU and then POSTED A LINK TO? I have to go find it again for you and post a link again?

Nope. I'm going to go back to DJ's post where he asked how you "rationalize" (I remember that word because he even pointed out to you that you said "ration" instead of "rationalize"). And then, even if it takes me all day (because I can only check between other tasts), I am going to read each and every post by you subsequent to DJ's question.

You see, Angryamerican, I think clarity in thinking and this discussion is worth the effort. I wish I thought you felt the same.

Yes i agree,and yes i did respond to that question.

[terri910]

Are you gonna address the post where you took scriptures out of context to support your view ?
I assume you mean a post from you expounding on your claim that I took scriptures out of context?

As soon as I find it.....no thanks to you.

[Angryamerican]

I assume you mean a post from you expounding on your claim that I took scriptures out of context?

As soon as I find it.....no thanks to you.

:)) found it this was my response.

The thing is Dj you are not posting enough of the story.

11. Then the Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man would speak to his companion, and he would return to the camp, but his attendant, Joshua, the son of Nun, a lad, would not depart from the tent. יא. וְדִבֶּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים כַּאֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ וְשָׁב אֶל הַמַּחֲנֶה וּמְשָׁרְתוֹ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן נַעַר לֹא יָמִישׁ מִתּוֹךְ הָאֹהֶל:
12. Moses said to the Lord: "Look, You say to me: 'Bring this people up!' But You have not informed me whom You will send with me. And You said: 'I have known you by name and you have also found favor in My eyes.' יב. וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל יְ־הֹוָ־ה רְאֵה אַתָּה אֹמֵר אֵלַי הַעַל אֶת הָעָם הַזֶּה וְאַתָּה לֹא הוֹדַעְתַּנִי אֵת אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁלַח עִמִּי וְאַתָּה אָמַרְתָּ יְדַעְתִּיךָ בְשֵׁם וְגַם מָצָאתָ חֵן בְּעֵינָי:
13. And now, if I have indeed found favor in Your eyes, pray let me know Your ways, so that I may know You, so that I may find favor in Your eyes; and consider that this nation is Your people." יג. וְעַתָּה אִם נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ הוֹדִעֵנִי נָא אֶת דְּרָכֶךָ וְאֵדָעֲךָ לְמַעַן אֶמְצָא חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ וּרְאֵה כִּי עַמְּךָ הַגּוֹי הַזֶּה:
14. So He said, "My Presence will go, and I will give you rest." יד. וַיֹּאמַר פָּנַי יֵלֵכוּ וַהֲנִחֹתִי לָךְ:
15. And he said to Him, "If Your Presence does not go [with us], do not take us up from here. טו. וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אִם אֵין פָּנֶיךָ הֹלְכִים אַל תַּעֲלֵנוּ מִזֶּה:
16. For how then will it be known that I have found favor in Your eyes, I and Your people? Is it not in that You will go with us? Then I and Your people will be distinguished from every [other] nation on the face of the earth." טז. וּבַמֶּה יִוָּדַע אֵפוֹא כִּי מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ אֲנִי וְעַמֶּךָ הֲלוֹא בְּלֶכְתְּךָ עִמָּנוּ וְנִפְלִינוּ אֲנִי וְעַמְּךָ מִכָּל הָעָם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה:
17. And the Lord said to Moses: "Even this thing that you have spoken, I will do, for you have found favor in My eyes, and I have known you by name." יז. וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה גַּם אֶת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר דִּבַּרְתָּ אֶעֱשֶׂה כִּי מָצָאתָ חֵן בְּעֵינַי וָאֵדָעֲךָ בְּשֵׁם:
18. And he said: "Show me, now, Your glory!" יח. וַיֹּאמַר הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ:
19. He said: "I will let all My goodness pass before you; I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you, and I will favor when I wish to favor, and I will have compassion when I wish to have compassion." יט. וַיֹּאמֶר אֲנִי אַעֲבִיר כָּל טוּבִי עַל פָּנֶיךָ וְקָרָאתִי בְשֵׁם יְ־הֹוָ־ה לְפָנֶיךָ וְחַנֹּתִי אֶת אֲשֶׁר אָחֹן וְרִחַמְתִּי אֶת אֲשֶׁר אֲרַחֵם:
20. And He said, "You will not be able to see My face, for man shall not see Me and live." כ. וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא תוּכַל לִרְאֹת אֶת פָּנָי כִּי לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי:
21. And the Lord said: "Behold, there is a place with Me, and you shall stand on the rock. כא. וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הֹוָ־ה הִנֵּה מָקוֹם אִתִּי וְנִצַּבְתָּ עַל הַצּוּר:
22. And it shall be that when My glory passes by, I will place you into the cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with My hand until I have passed by. כב. וְהָיָה בַּעֲבֹר כְּבֹדִי וְשַׂמְתִּיךָ בְּנִקְרַת הַצּוּר וְשַׂכֹּתִי כַפִּי עָלֶיךָ עַד עָבְרִי:
23. Then I will remove My hand, and you will see My back but My face shall not be seen."


Who is moses truly seeing here ?

Well lets see who the presence of God is.

Isa 63:9 In all their affliction He was afflicted, and the Angel of His Presence saved them; in His love and in His pity He redeemed them; and He bore them, and carried them all the days of old.

Who did moses see in the burning bush ?

Did he truly see God face to face ?

He said here no one can see his face or they will die.

So the face to face comment has a different meaning than what you think.

[terri910]

Yes i agree,
Yes, you agree to WHAT? That clarity in thinking and this discussion is WORTH THE EFFORT TO GO BACK AND FIND POSTS THAT YOU SAY WERE MADE? Talk is cheap. I'll believe that when you back it up with effort.
...and yes i did respond to that question.
Oh, I've no doubt you responded to it. What I'm wanting to find is an answer. Not the same thing at all.

[Angryamerican]

So, you figure everyone else that does not glean the same meaning from the same Bible hasn't really dedicated themselves to the word of God?


I guess this comes under, "Nope, I didn't mean to say what I said."

It came out wrong.

No,i am saying if they continue on in reading instead of stopping and posting what supports their view, they would see that scriptures later on cleared up the parable that you were quoting.

[Angryamerican]

Yes, you agree to WHAT? That clarity in thinking and this discussion is WORTH THE EFFORT TO GO BACK AND FIND POSTS THAT YOU SAY WERE MADE? Talk is cheap. I'll believe that when you back it up with effort.
...
Oh, I've no doubt you responded to it. What I'm wanting to find is an answer. Not the same thing at all.

Terri you remind me of my sweet little wife.

[terri910]

:)) found it this was my response.

<snip>
That's what I thought. I do not see an ANSWER to DispensationalJim's question.

[Angryamerican]

That's what I thought. I do not see an ANSWER to DispensationalJim's question.

Care to be more specific ?

[terri910]

It came out wrong.
Exactly. You didn't mean to say what you actually said. You meant it to say something different.

No,i am saying if they continue on in reading instead of stopping and posting what supports their view, they would see that scriptures later on cleared up the parable that you were quoting.
Your explanation here presumes that those that do not agree with your understanding of God's word have not "continued reading." And, gosh, if people would just stop posting that pesky scriptural evidence that their view may be correct, they'd have to agree with you.

Good luck with that, Angryamerican.:hug:

[terri910]

Care to be more specific ?
Sure. Why not take DJ's post and break it down, perhaps paragraph by paragraph and respond to each? Take each specific verse that he asked how you reconcile, and EXPLAIN how you reconcile it. Presumably, your understanding of the those scriptures will be different than DJ's (or the two of you would agree on what they say), so you can explain WHAT your understanding of those scriptures are.

[Angryamerican]

Terri i showed him in the very chapter where he cherry picked scriptures to support his view or him trying to show that man has seen God,that he did not post moses could not look on the face of God he would die.

So i asked him if that face to face really meant face to face.

And i also showed who moses saw,it was the Angel of the Lord that he saw and the same Angel he saw in the burning bush.

[Angryamerican]

Exactly. You didn't mean to say what you actually said. You meant it to say something different.


Your explanation here presumes that those that do not agree with your understanding of God's word have not "continued reading." And, gosh, if people would just stop posting that pesky scriptural evidence that their view may be correct, they'd have to agree with you.

Good luck with that, Angryamerican.:hug:

No i just think it is important to agree with what God is actually saying :hug:

[Angryamerican]

Sure. Why not take DJ's post and break it down, perhaps paragraph by paragraph and respond to each? Take each specific verse that he asked how you reconcile, and EXPLAIN how you reconcile it. Presumably, your understanding of the those scriptures will be different than DJ's (or the two of you would agree on what they say), so you can explain WHAT your understanding of those scriptures are.

Gods presence was through his Angel , Gods appearance was through his Angel.

[terri910]

No i just think it is important to agree with what God is actually saying :hug:
Trinitarians think that is important, too, Angryamerican. Which is why we have this discussion.

[terri910]

Terri i showed him in the very chapter where he cherry picked scriptures to support his view or him trying to show that man has seen God,that he did not post moses could not look on the face of God he would die.

So i asked him if that face to face really meant face to face.

And i also showed who moses saw,it was the Angel of the Lord that he saw and the same Angel he saw in the burning bush.
What you DIDN'T do, Angryamerican is explain how YOU reconcile them.

You asked me if I could be more specific, and I told you how you could be. You telling me what you said, doesn't make your response more specific. If it had been specific in the first place, I would have recognized it as an answer.

And, by the way, DispensationalJim posted scriptures from more than just one book.

[Angryamerican]

Trinitarians think that is important, too, Angryamerican. Which is why we have this discussion.

So in other words,Gods word should settle the discussion. ;)

[Angryamerican]

What you DIDN'T do, Angryamerican is explain how YOU reconcile them.

You asked me if I could be more specific, and I told you how you could be. You telling me what you said, doesn't make your response more specific. If it had been specific in the first place, I would have recognized it as an answer.

And, by the way, DispensationalJim posted scriptures from more than just one book.

That is true, but does one verse cancel out another one ?

[Angryamerican]

What you DIDN'T do, Angryamerican is explain how YOU reconcile them.

You asked me if I could be more specific, and I told you how you could be. You telling me what you said, doesn't make your response more specific. If it had been specific in the first place, I would have recognized it as an answer.

And, by the way, DispensationalJim posted scriptures from more than just one book.

Do you believe this was God that jacob was wrestling ? and that wrestling was not literal was it ? do you think maybe he was just talking to him ?

No man has seen God at anytime.

Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

1Jn 4:12 No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwells in us, and His love is perfected in us.



Is God a man ?

Num 23:19 God is not a man that He should lie, neither the son of man that He should repent. Has He said, and shall He not do it? Or has He spoken, and shall He not make it good?


Now read what Dj posted.


Gen 32:24 And Jacob was left alone. And a Man wrestled there with him until the breaking of the day.
Gen 32:25 And when He saw that He did not prevail against him, He touched the hollow of his thigh. And the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint as he wrestled with Him.
Gen 32:26 And He said, Let Me go, for the day breaks. And he said, I will not let You go except You bless me.
Gen 32:27 And He said to him, What is your name? And he said, Jacob.
Gen 32:28 And He said, Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel; for like a prince you have power with God and with men, and have prevailed.
Gen 32:29 And Jacob asked and said, I pray You, reveal Your name. And He said, Why do you ask after My name? And He blessed him there.
Gen 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Face of God; for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

Now knowing from what i posted earlier if you cannot look on the face of God,than why would you think that was God that jacob saw face to face ?

[the oldtimer]

Terri i showed him in the very chapter where he cherry picked scriptures to support his view or him trying to show that man has seen God,that he did not post moses could not look on the face of God he would die.

So i asked him if that face to face really meant face to face.

And i also showed who moses saw,it was the Angel of the Lord that he saw and the same Angel he saw in the burning bush.
1. What does the term "face to face" mean to you??
2. We know that Moses saw an angel of the Lord in the burning bush. Ex.3:2 There the angel of the Lord appeared to him......
But, we also know that it was not the angel that spoke to Moses, Ex 3:4, "When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, "GOD" called to him from within the burning bush". It was not the angel, but "GOD" as the Bible clearly states. This is the third time I have posted the same message. It can be clearly seen if one were to look. And there is no way to say it was the angel speaking as it says, "GOD" called him from within the bush.

[terri910]

So in other words,Gods word should settle the discussion. ;)
Actually, that isn't what I said at all. What I said was that Trinitarians think it is important to agree with what God is actually saying.

What you're saying here is another thought altogether. And one in which there is debate as to exactly who has a correct understanding of what God's word actually says.

[Angryamerican]

Sorry terri i edited my post while you were replying.

[terri910]

That is true, but does one verse cancel out another one ?
Whether someone else believes that or not does not show how YOU reconcile the verses, Angryamerican. Why not answer a questionwith statements of your own thoughts, rather than ask more of your own questions?

[terri910]

<snipping repetition of previous posts>

Now read what Dj posted.

<snipping repetition of previous posts>
Still haven't read how YOU reconcile the verses DispensationalJim posted.

[Angryamerican]

1. What does the term "face to face" mean to you??
2. We know that Moses saw an angel of the Lord in the burning bush. Ex.3:2 There the angel of the Lord appeared to him......
But, we also know that it was not the angel that spoke to Moses, Ex 3:4, "When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, "GOD" called to him from within the burning bush". It was not the angel, but "GOD" as the Bible clearly states. This is the third time I have posted the same message. It can be clearly seen if one were to look. And there is no way to say it was the angel speaking as it says, "GOD" called him from within the bush.

So the Angel was not speaking in behalf of God ?

That was not God speaking to moses, And Jesus said this.

Joh 5:37 And He sending Me, the Father Himself, has borne witness of Me. Neither have you heard His voice at any time nor seen His shape.

[Angryamerican]

Actually, that isn't what I said at all. What I said was that Trinitarians think it is important to agree with what God is actually saying.

What you're saying here is another thought altogether. And one in which there is debate as to exactly who has a correct understanding of what God's word actually says.


Nope Gods word speaks the truth,you just have to pay attention to what is really being said.

[Angryamerican]

One more point terri,when moses was speaking to God how was he speaking to God ?

Notice the last verse that i just posted in this post.

Exo 32:7 And Jehovah said to Moses, Go! Get down, for your people, whom you brought out of the land of Egypt, are corrupted.
Exo 32:8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them. They have made them a molten calf, and have worshiped it, and have sacrificed to it, and said, These are your gods, O Israel, who have brought you up out of the land of Egypt.
Exo 32:9 And Jehovah said to Moses, I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people.
Exo 32:10 And now leave Me alone, so that My wrath may become hot against them and so that I may consume them. And I will make of you a great nation.
Exo 32:11 And Moses prayed to Jehovah his God, and said, Jehovah, why does Your wrath become hot against Your people whom You have brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand?

[the oldtimer]

Do you believe this was God that jacob was wrestling ? and that wrestling was not literal was it ? do you think maybe he was just talking to him ? Gen.32: 24, (NWT) ..... Then a man began to grapple with him.....
What, pray tell does the word "grapple" mean. And if the "grappling" was not literal, why is the word used even in the NWT??? Do YOU think maybe he was just talking to him???
Cause that ain't what the Bible says.
And who was Jacob wrestling with? Gen. 32:28,(NWT) .....for you have contended with "GOD"...........


Gen 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Face of God; for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

Now knowing from what i posted earlier if you cannot look on the face of God,than why would you think that was God that jacob saw face to face ? That is easy. Because Jacob said so. Now with me having a somewhat logical mind! Who am I going to believe, Jacob or you????

[the oldtimer]

So the Angel was not speaking in behalf of God ?

That was not God speaking to moses,
Now, the Bible says, point blank, without a doubt, that it was "GOD" speaking from the bush. Even in the NWT, it says it is "GOD". So, to me it was "GOD"

[DispensationalJim]

It is the same chapter you quoted to me Dj. :angel:

I quoted several verses from several different books to you in the post when you responded with that passage without the refernces.

So, please, give an old guy a break and just tell me what book, at least. Thank you. :)

[terri910]

Nope Gods word speaks the truth,you just have to pay attention to what is really being said.
I never said -- nor implied -- that God's word doesn't speak the truth.

Nor have I disagreed that one must pay attention to what is really being said. What I have continually pointed out to you is that there is disagreement as to exactly WHICH PERSONS are not paying attention to what is REALLY BEING SAID.

I'll bet you'd get my point if I phrased in a way that you or DRS might -- and then you would say that either or both of you were being "attacked."

[terri910]

One more point terri,when moses was speaking to God how was he speaking to God ?

Notice the last verse that i just posted in this post.

Exo 32:7 And Jehovah said to Moses, Go! Get down, for your people, whom you brought out of the land of Egypt, are corrupted.
Exo 32:8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them. They have made them a molten calf, and have worshiped it, and have sacrificed to it, and said, These are your gods, O Israel, who have brought you up out of the land of Egypt.
Exo 32:9 And Jehovah said to Moses, I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people.
Exo 32:10 And now leave Me alone, so that My wrath may become hot against them and so that I may consume them. And I will make of you a great nation.
Exo 32:11 And Moses prayed to Jehovah his God, and said, Jehovah, why does Your wrath become hot against Your people whom You have brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand?
Please explain your point, as it pertains to the concept of the Holy Trinity.

[DispensationalJim]

Sure i do,i just let Gods word interpret itself.

So which "version" of God's Word do you use which "interprets itself," AA? The versions do NOT agree with each other, you know. So you must have figured out which ONE version is God's Word. So which ONE is it (in your opinion, of course)?

[terri910]

I quoted several verses from several different books to you in the post when you responded with that passage without the refernces.

So, please, give an old guy a break and just tell me what book, at least. Thank you. :)
I have to agree with you, DispensationalJim. It would be helpful if participants would cite the book/chapter/verse, but if they forget to do so and someone asks for it, to refuse to do so is just rude, in my opinion.

[DispensationalJim]

I have to agree with you, DispensationalJim. It would be helpful if participants would cite the book/chapter/verse, but if they forget to do so and someone asks for it, to refuse to do so is just rude, in my opinion.

Thanks, terri. I've been trying to catch up on this thread for a couple of days, and finally just got to your most recent post. I certainly appreciate your efforts to try to get AA to actually answer my questions.

I just read where he seemed to imply some verses were posted by me which I don't remember using, so I'll go back and repost my original one so he can reply to it again hopefully with the references so I can respond back with a more complete understanding of what he is trying to say. I must admit it is frustrating, though, to deal with folks who aren't considerate enough to make things simple or convenient for the rest of us...

[DispensationalJim]

Dj are you being sneaky ? i showed you who Jesus was before he became a man.:razz:

No, AA, I have no need or reason to be sneaky. Are you feeling guily about being sneaky yourself, AA?

AA, you showed us what your OPINION was of who you THINK Jesus was, but I believe I gave some reasonable evidence (along with T-Jim and oldtimer) that you were just plain wrong on that issue. But we can go around on that again later if you wish to bring it up.

[DispensationalJim]

From page 36, post #22841:

It seems to me, AA, that you have a serious conundrum on your hands, there.

How do YOU rationalize this verse then? BTW, AA, I think "rationalize" is the word you should have used above -- look up "ration" and see.
• John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

=====================================

And then here is another conundrum for you, AA:

• Gen. 32:30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
• Gen. 33:10 And Jacob said, Nay, I pray thee, if now I have found grace in thy sight, then receive my present at my hand: for therefore I have seen thy face, as though I had seen the face of God, and thou wast pleased with me.
• Ex. 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
• Ex. 24:11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.
• Num. 14:14 And they will tell it to the inhabitants of this land: for they have heard that thou LORD art AMONG THIS PEOPLE, THAT THOU LORD art seen face to face, and that thy cloud standeth over them, and that thou goest before them, by day time in a pillar of a cloud, and in a pillar of fire by night.
• Deut. 5:4 The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,

================================

So, AA, can you "rationalize" those verses with your "No man can see God"?

As I searched for this post, I noticed that DRS responded to it with verses but no book and chapter long before AA did.

AA responded at least twice to it before eventually posting some verses without the book and chapter, so how about it AA and DRS? Please be considerate and give us the book reference at least so we can give you a more appropriate answer. Thank you for your consideration. :)

[terri910]

No,i am saying if they continue on in reading instead of stopping and posting what supports their view, they would see that scriptures later on cleared up the parable that you were quoting.
This has been gnawing at me all day. I want to know what parable I quoted that you think later scriptures "clears up." I don't want to know what scriptures you think clears it up. I don't want to know what you think is cleared up. I want to know what parable I quoted, because I just don't remember quoting a parable.

I anticipate you will not remember what you were talking about here, or where you can find my post. Please learn the search function (I feel as though I am preventing you from learning this yourself by continuing to provide it for you).
http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?p=55449051&highlight=these+are+Jesus%27+words#post55449051

[DRS]

It is also stated in the Bible that Jesus is before "ALL" things. I am well aware that in the NWT. the word [other] was ADDED by your religion (which must remain nameless). Thus changing the meaning of the scripture to fit their dogma. But, the truth remains that the verse does say Jesus, was"before, ALL things. And yes I am aware that you do not believe that the word "ALL" means "EVERYTHING". So, that should save you some time.
My point is, that you will accept a verse that you KNOW has a word added (NWT) but will not accept it as it is originally written (KJV). This to me is illogical.
And you twist Prov.8:22 to be talking about Jesus having a beginning when it is very clearly, in context speaking of wisdom. This has been debated many times in the past but you have never explained in logical terms how this change can be made.


The other is because in verse 15 Paul establishes Jesus is part of creation and enjoys being the firsborn of all creation

[DRS]

From page 36, post #22841:



As I searched for this post, I noticed that DRS responded to it with verses but no book and chapter long before AA did.

AA responded at least twice to it before eventually posting some verses without the book and chapter, so how about it AA and DRS? Please be considerate and give us the book reference at least so we can give you a more appropriate answer. Thank you for your consideration. :)

Why not just read on since they are the rest of the chapter you quoted

[DRS]

Now, the Bible says, point blank, without a doubt, that it was "GOD" speaking from the bush. Even in the NWT, it says it is "GOD". So, to me it was "GOD"

Exodus 3:2*Then Jehovah’s angel appeared to him in a flame of fire in the midst of a thornbush. As he kept looking, why, here the thornbush was burning with the fire and yet the thornbush was not consumed. 3*At this Moses said: “Let me just turn aside that I may inspect this great phenomenon, as to why the thornbush is not burnt up


Acts 7:30*“And when forty years were fulfilled, there appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Si′nai an angel in the fiery flame of a thornbush

’ 35*This Moses, whom they disowned, saying, ‘Who appointed you ruler and judge?’ this man God sent off as both ruler and deliverer by the hand of the angel that appeared to him in the thornbush.

[Angryamerican]

Gen.32: 24, (NWT) ..... Then a man began to grapple with him.....
What, pray tell does the word "grapple" mean. And if the "grappling" was not literal, why is the word used even in the NWT??? Do YOU think maybe he was just talking to him???
Cause that ain't what the Bible says.
And who was Jacob wrestling with? Gen. 32:28,(NWT) .....for you have contended with "GOD"...........

That is easy. Because Jacob said so. Now with me having a somewhat logical mind! Who am I going to believe, Jacob or you????

Let me say how illogical your thinking is,it was a man he was wrestling with.

Second do you think a man can grapple with a God ?:))

[Angryamerican]

Now, the Bible says, point blank, without a doubt, that it was "GOD" speaking from the bush. Even in the NWT, it says it is "GOD". So, to me it was "GOD"

I will trust Jesus words when he said no man has seen nor heard the voice of God at ANYTIME. That was easy.

[Angryamerican]

I quoted several verses from several different books to you in the post when you responded with that passage without the refernces.

So, please, give an old guy a break and just tell me what book, at least. Thank you. :)

I don't recall.

[DRS]

Gen.32: 24, (NWT) ..... Then a man began to grapple with him.....
What, pray tell does the word "grapple" mean. And if the "grappling" was not literal, why is the word used even in the NWT??? Do YOU think maybe he was just talking to him???
Cause that ain't what the Bible says.
And who was Jacob wrestling with? Gen. 32:28,(NWT) .....for you have contended with "GOD"...........

That is easy. Because Jacob said so. Now with me having a somewhat logical mind! Who am I going to believe, Jacob or you????

Well you can always ask Hosea who tells us it was an angel

12:2*“And Jehovah has a legal case with Judah, even to hold an accounting against Jacob according to his ways; according to his dealings he will repay him. 3*In the belly he seized his brother by the heel, and with his dynamic energy he contended with God. 4*And he kept contending with an angel and gradually prevailed. He wept, that he might implore favor for himself.”
At Beth′el He got to find him, and there He began talking with us

[Angryamerican]

I never said -- nor implied -- that God's word doesn't speak the truth.

Nor have I disagreed that one must pay attention to what is really being said. What I have continually pointed out to you is that there is disagreement as to exactly WHICH PERSONS are not paying attention to what is REALLY BEING SAID.

I'll bet you'd get my point if I phrased in a way that you or DRS might -- and then you would say that either or both of you were being "attacked."

It's been pretty obvious to me, when someone posts a scripture and says it means one thing ,then i read the whole chapter and find out that was not what was being said at all.

[terri910]

Why not just read on since they are the rest of the chapter you quoted
Because, as has already been pointed out, DispensationalJim cited several different books and chapters. And it would be a kindness to consider the time of other's as having some value, and supply the information.

I think your refusal to do so is rather passive/aggressive, DRS.

[Angryamerican]

Please explain your point, as it pertains to the concept of the Holy Trinity.

It don't have anything to do with the trinity, it had to do with what we were talking about earlier.

And to be truthful i have not seen any scripture that had to do anything with the trinity.

[DRS]

Whose goings forth have been from old, from the days of eternity . . . A beginning for God the Son???

Hardly . . .

Micah 5:2*“And you, O Beth′le‧hem Eph′ra‧thah, the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah, from you there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel, whose origin is from early times, from the days of time indefinite

When did Jehovah install him

Proverbs 8:22*“Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23*From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth.

[Angryamerican]

So which "version" of God's Word do you use which "interprets itself," AA? The versions do NOT agree with each other, you know. So you must have figured out which ONE version is God's Word. So which ONE is it (in your opinion, of course)?

Nope, i still use several different versions to avoid translators agendas.

[DRS]

Because, as has already been pointed out, DispensationalJim cited several different books and chapters. And it would be a kindness to consider the time of other's as having some value, and supply the information.

I think your refusal to do so is rather passive/aggressive, DRS.

Then all he has to do is read the entire chapters that he has posted

[terri910]

It's been pretty obvious to me, when someone posts a scripture and says it means one thing ,then i read the whole chapter and find out that was not what was being said at all.
I know that feeling quite well, Angryamerican. I can't count the number of times that has happened. Once again, though, you and I differ on who has misinterpreted scripture.

For me, there is an added bonus of the same people that I believe have misinterpreted scripture, seem to be the same ones that will say that a participant of this forum has said one thing, then I read the actual post and find out that was not what was being said at all.

Come to think of it....:think:....those are the same people, that when the actual author of the post tells them they have it wrong, still refuse to believe it. Which dovetails quite nicely into the same reaction with scripture...

[terri910]

Then all he has to do is read the entire chapters that he has posted
It would be a kindness and a consideration to others.

And you refuse to do that kindness or have that consideration.

[DRS]

And why would He say" if you have seen me, you have seen the father" :doh:

Because he reflected God perfectly as I showed you from the words of Paul

Hebrews 1:. 3*He is the reflection of [his] glory and the exact representation of his very being, and he sustains all things by the word of his power; and after he had made a purification for our sins he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in lofty places.

[Angryamerican]

I have to agree with you, DispensationalJim. It would be helpful if participants would cite the book/chapter/verse, but if they forget to do so and someone asks for it, to refuse to do so is just rude, in my opinion.

I think it is rude for someone to ask a question and they can't provide the question.

Do you understand how many responses i have made in this thread not to mention how many times i have had to answer the same question over and over.

Sometimes i do make a mistake,imagine that :razz:

[DRS]

Passive-aggressive.

Do you think it will really make a difference?

[Angryamerican]

Thanks, terri. I've been trying to catch up on this thread for a couple of days, and finally just got to your most recent post. I certainly appreciate your efforts to try to get AA to actually answer my questions.

I just read where he seemed to imply some verses were posted by me which I don't remember using, so I'll go back and repost my original one so he can reply to it again hopefully with the references so I can respond back with a more complete understanding of what he is trying to say. I must admit it is frustrating, though, to deal with folks who aren't considerate enough to make things simple or convenient for the rest of us...

I have already responded.

[DRS]

It would be a kindness and a consideration to others.

And you refuse to do that kindness or have that consideration.

What chapters did he post?

[terri910]

It don't have anything to do with the trinity, it had to do with what we were talking about earlier.
Are you certain that the other person wasn't originally making some point regarding the Trinity?

And to be truthful i have not seen any scripture that had to do anything with the trinity.
I know you have not recognized it, Angryamerican.

[DRS]

Christian!!

Are you ashamed of your denomination?

[terri910]

What chapters did he post?
This isn't that difficult, and because you asked, I will do you the kindness of supplying what you request.

John 14
Genesis 32
Genesis 33
Exodus 33
Exodus 24
Numbers 14
Deuteronomy 5

[Angryamerican]

This has been gnawing at me all day. I want to know what parable I quoted that you think later scriptures "clears up." I don't want to know what scriptures you think clears it up. I don't want to know what you think is cleared up. I want to know what parable I quoted, because I just don't remember quoting a parable.

I anticipate you will not remember what you were talking about here, or where you can find my post. Please learn the search function (I feel as though I am preventing you from learning this yourself by continuing to provide it for you).
http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?p=55449051&highlight=these+are+Jesus%27+words#post55449051

I and the Father are one was part of a parable in john chapter 10.

The Father is in me and i in the Father,part of a parable.

But later in both cases it gets cleared up by scripture.

[Angryamerican]

Why not just read on since they are the rest of the chapter you quoted

Bingo,thank you Daniel.

[DRS]

This isn't that difficult, and because you asked, I will do you the kindness of supplying what you request.

John 14
Genesis 32
Genesis 33
Exodus 33
Exodus 24
Numbers 14
Deuteronomy 5

John 14 belive I responded to using Hebrews 1

Genesis 32 I used Hosea

Exodus 33 I used Exodus 33 in which God says not man may see my face and live

And Numbers 14 I used Numbers 14

[Angryamerican]

Because, as has already been pointed out, DispensationalJim cited several different books and chapters. And it would be a kindness to consider the time of other's as having some value, and supply the information.

I think your refusal to do so is rather passive/aggressive, DRS.

Terri everything Dj quoted was responded to.

[DRS]

I and the Father are one was part of a parable in john chapter 10.

The Father is in me and i in the Father,part of a parable.

But later in both cases it gets cleared up by scripture.

If the expression the Father and I are was a trinity proof text, then John 17 would make everyone God

; 21*in order that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, in order that the world may believe that you sent me forth.

[Angryamerican]

It would be a kindness and a consideration to others.

And you refuse to do that kindness or have that consideration.

It was a mistake on my part ok.

I usually try not to forget to put the book and chapter.

[Angryamerican]

Are you certain that the other person wasn't originally making some point regarding the Trinity?


I know you have not recognized it, Angryamerican.

He was trying to show moses did see God face to face and that simply is not the case.

[Angryamerican]

If the expression the Father and I are was a trinity proof text, then John 17 would make everyone God

; 21*in order that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, in order that the world may believe that you sent me forth.

Yep tried showing them that, and evidently it did not register.

Yeah we would all be God,what a blasphemous thing to suggest.

[terri910]

Terri everything Dj quoted was responded to.
This is about the issue of citing scriptures, Angryamerican.

[DRS]

Yep tried showing them that, and evidently it did not register.

Yeah we would all be God,what a blasphemous thing to suggest.


Yeah besides that I am always trying to convience girls I am God's gift to them

Can't be both God and His gift :D

[terri910]

I and the Father are one was part of a parable in john chapter 10.

The Father is in me and i in the Father,part of a parable.

But later in both cases it gets cleared up by scripture.
I do not believe that is a parable. Jesus uses a parable earlier in the chapter, but I do not believe those verses are part of that parable.

[Angryamerican]

This is about the issue of citing scriptures, Angryamerican.

Ok i will be more careful.

[terri910]

If the expression the Father and I are was a trinity proof text, then John 17 would make everyone God

; 21*in order that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, in order that the world may believe that you sent me forth.
And you might have a point if that were the only text offered, DRS. But you know that isn't the case.

[terri910]

It was a mistake on my part ok.

I usually try not to forget to put the book and chapter.
I'm sure you do, that post of mine (that you replied to here) was to DRS. Anyone can forget to post the citation, but when someone is asked to provide them, to refuse to do so is not a "mistake."

[DRS]

And you might have a point if that were the only text offered, DRS. But you know that isn't the case.

You can give more text and I can explain them using the bible

[terri910]

He was trying to show moses did see God face to face and that simply is not the case.
To be honest, Angryamerican, it seems to be something of a side issue. But I can't imagine how it came up unless someone was trying to make some sort of argument for or against the Trinity.

[terri910]

You can give more text and I can explain them using the bible
There are more than 2300 pages of people providing scriptures and their explanations, using the Bible.

You above claim is hardly unique. Even in this thread.

[DRS]

To be honest, Angryamerican, it seems to be something of a side issue. But I can't imagine how it came up unless someone was trying to make some sort of argument for or against the Trinity.

Probably due to the fact the bible says no man has seen God at anytime

[Angryamerican]

I do not believe that is a parable. Jesus uses a parable earlier in the chapter, but I do not believe those verses are part of that parable.

He ends the parable at verse 18 and then continues it in verse 25.

Joh 10:6 Jesus spoke this parable to them, but they did not understand what it was which He spoke to them.
Joh 10:7 Then Jesus said to them again, Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.
Joh 10:8 All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them.
Joh 10:9 I am the door. If anyone enters in by Me, he shall be saved and shall go in and out and find pasture.
Joh 10:10 The thief does not come except to steal and to kill and to destroy. I have come so that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
Joh 10:11 I am the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.
Joh 10:12 But he who is a hireling and not the shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and runs away. And the wolf catches them and scatters the sheep.
Joh 10:13 The hireling flees, because he is a hireling and does not care for the sheep.
Joh 10:14 I am the Good Shepherd, and I know those that are Mine, and I am known by those who are Mine.
Joh 10:15 Even as the Father knows Me, I also know the Father. And I lay down My life for the sheep.
Joh 10:16 And I have other sheep who are not of this fold. I must also lead those, and they shall hear My voice, and there shall be one flock, one Shepherd.
Joh 10:17 Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I might take it again.
Joh 10:18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down from Myself. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it again. I have received this commandment from My Father.
Joh 10:19 Then a division occurred again among the Jews because of these words.
Joh 10:20 And many of them said, He has a demon and is insane. Why do you hear him?
Joh 10:21 Others said, These are not words of one who has been possessed by a demon. A demon is not able to open the eyes of blind ones.
Joh 10:22 And the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem, and it was winter.
Joh 10:23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's Porch.
Joh 10:24 Then the Jews encircled Him and said to Him, How long do you make us doubt? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.
Joh 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you and you did not believe. The works that I do in My Father's name, they bear witness of Me.
Joh 10:26 But you did not believe because you are not of My sheep. As I said to you,
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.
Joh 10:28 And I give to them eternal life, and they shall never ever perish, and not anyone shall pluck them out of My hand.
Joh 10:29 My Father who gave them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand.
Joh 10:30 I and the Father are one!

They are one in purpose and unity.

Joh 17:11 And now I am in the world no longer, but these are in the world, and I come to You, Holy Father. Keep them in Your name, those whom You have given Me, so that they may be one as We are.

Joh 17:22 And I have given them the glory which You have given Me, that they may be one, even as We are one,

[Angryamerican]

To be honest, Angryamerican, it seems to be something of a side issue. But I can't imagine how it came up unless someone was trying to make some sort of argument for or against the Trinity.

Then ask Dj his intent and what was he trying to show.

[terri910]

Yep tried showing them that, and evidently it did not register.

Yeah we would all be God,what a blasphemous thing to suggest.
You know that to Trinitarians, things are shown to you and it appears that it doesn't "register" with you, right?

No matter what you say, Angryamerican, you and DRS and everyone else here is presenting what they believe to be the correct interpretation of Holy Scripture. It isn't a matter of anything not "registering," it is a matter of believing that the interpretation given is what the Bible, in it's totality, actually says.

[terri910]

Then ask Dj his intent and what was he trying to show.
I am happy to do that.

Can you provide me with DispensationalJim's post? (And you are certain it was Jim and not oldtimer, right?)

I'm guessing that with a little bit of effort, the conversation can be traced back to it's origin in the thread.

[Angryamerican]

I am happy to do that.

Can you provide me with DispensationalJim's post? (And you are certain it was Jim and not oldtimer, right?)

I'm guessing that with a little bit of effort, the conversation can be traced back to it's origin in the thread.

Dj reposted it and so did you.

[Angryamerican]

I am happy to do that.

Can you provide me with DispensationalJim's post? (And you are certain it was Jim and not oldtimer, right?)

I'm guessing that with a little bit of effort, the conversation can be traced back to it's origin in the thread.

Dj tried using the same scriptures earlier in this thread to show man has seen God and i had to show him the same things all over again.

I believe Drs did the same thing with him.

It was the Angel of Jehovah that moses and jacob saw and spoke to.

The Angel of Gods presence.

Isa 63:9 In all their affliction He was afflicted, and the Angel of His Presence saved them; in His love and in His pity He redeemed them; and He bore them, and carried them all the days of old.

[Reeder]

He was trying to show moses did see God face to face and that simply is not the case.


Exodus 33: 11
11 And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend...

:think:

[Angryamerican]

Exodus 33: 11
11 And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend...

:think:

Later in the same chapter do you still believe Moses saw God face to face ?

Exo 33:20 And He said, You cannot see My face. For there no man can see Me and live.

[terri910]

Dj reposted it and so did you.
Oh, you mean the one where he was asking how YOU reconcile the verses?

[terri910]

He ends the parable at verse 18 and then continues it in verse 25.I believe he explains the earlier parable more explicitly, not "continue" it.

They are one in purpose and unity.
I believe Jesus when he said He and the Father are one (particularly so because it is not the only scriptures that indicate it). I do not believe that the more explicit explanation was the qualified one you have given here. Speaking of the qualified explanation you have given here, I understand what it is to be "one in purpose"....can you tell me what you mean by "one in unity"? It seems redundant to me.

[terri910]

Exodus 33: 11
11 And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend...

:think:
Gosh....I wonder if that will "register"....


I couldn't resist.

[the oldtimer]

Exodus 3:2*Then Jehovah’s angel appeared to him in a flame of fire in the midst of a thornbush. As he kept looking, why, here the thornbush was burning with the fire and yet the thornbush was not consumed. 3*At this Moses said: “Let me just turn aside that I may inspect this great phenomenon, as to why the thornbush is not burnt up Why did you stop there when the very next verse says plainly that it was God who spoke out of the bush. If you are not deliberately trying to misslead what is your point. What you have posted about this verse certainly does not fit what the Bible says. I have said before, yes it was an angel that appeared in the bush, but the bible says clearly that it was God who spoke
Acts 7:30*“And when forty years were fulfilled, there appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Si′nai an angel in the fiery flame of a thornbush

’ 35*This Moses, whom they disowned, saying, ‘Who appointed you ruler and judge?’ this man God sent off as both ruler and deliverer by the hand of the angel that appeared to him in the thornbush.
We are not discussing thes verses are we?

[Angryamerican]

Oh, you mean the one where he was asking how YOU reconcile the verses?

Yes,i thought you did to.

[Angryamerican]

I believe he explains the earlier parable more explicitly, not "continue" it.


I believe Jesus when he said He and the Father are one (particularly so because it is not the only scriptures that indicate it). I do not believe that the more explicit explanation was the qualified one you have given here. Speaking of the qualified explanation you have given here, I understand what it is to be "one in purpose"....can you tell me what you mean by "one in unity"? It seems redundant to me.

Jesus does the will of his Father which puts them in a perfect unity.

If we should be one like the Father and son what do you think it means ?

You and i are not the same being.

And you and i do not help make up God.

[Angryamerican]

Gosh....I wonder if that will "register"....


I couldn't resist.

Yeah it did but i finished reading what was written :razz:

[Angryamerican]

Have a great week all.

[terri910]

Jesus does the will of his Father which puts them in a perfect unity.
Unity is the state of "being one." "One in unity" just seems redundant to me. In fact, it seems like you are saying that Jesus and the Father are, well, one. Just like I believe.

If we should be one like the Father and son what do you think it means ?

You and i are not the same being.

And you and i do not help make up God.
As I said, Angryamerican, if that one scripture were the only place it was mentioned, you'd have a point. But it isn't.

You and I do not help make up God, but we are called to to help make God (not just one person of the Trinity) real to the world.

[terri910]

Yeah it did but i finished reading what was written :razz:
So did I, Angryamerican. So what are you attempting to imply?